On what would have been his 84th birthday, Harvey Milk---a San Francisco Supervisor assassinated by former Supervisor Dan White on November 27, 1978, had a stamp dedicated in his honor at the White House.
So angry about this honor is the American Family Association that the organization is directing its staff and national members to not only boycott use of the stamp, but to refuse to open any mail to which the stamp is affixed.
And yet, despite such protests, post offices around the United States are experiencing high demand for the stamp; demand akin to past sales of other long-anticipated commemorative stamps.
What are your thoughts on the stamp and the decidedly negative or positive reactions of some to the stamp?
We shouldn't honor someone promoting civil rights? Or, considering Martin King is black and Cesar Chavez is brown, we shouldn't honor white people promoting civil rights?
Guess I'm just a dumb hillbilly, 'cause I don't get it at all.
I strongly suspect that some among us cannot tolerate the fact that honoring Harvey Milk---for promoting the civil rights of gay and lesbian people, means that American attitudes have changed about gay and lesbian people; that Americans have come (for the most part) to understand that homosexuality is an immutable trait (like race or ethnicity) and that gay rights issues are, in fact, civil rights issues.
Does that mean that we should only honor people that promote civil rights we personally participate in? Because I should probably ignore references to the likes of Susan B Anthony, Margaret Sanger and Eleanor Roosevelt if that's the case. Too bad, as I highly respect all those women, but they all fought for women's rights in one way or another, and I don't have the proper equipment to participate. I suppose I'd better take out the L in LGBT as well, right?
But enough sarcasm - yes, America is changing here. As usual, the people are dragging the religions along by the scruff of the neck, kicking and screaming all the way, but eventually the church will catch up to the improved moral structure of our society. It just takes time, and never ending effort to protect the rights of everyone, not a select few that think they have the right to make moral decisions for all. Eventually they will decide that their god of love didn't hate the people He created, after all. That they are people, too, just as blacks and women are.
I really don't think it's an issue unless someone's being forced to buy it. And then....really? A stamp is worth arguing over? Geez America is bored.
by Charles James4 years ago
I am not an American, but what goes on in the USA is important to the world.Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves. One would expect black Americans to generally vote Republican. But they don't.How did this come...
by kirstenblog4 years ago
If the various race anti-discrimination laws were to go how much racism do you think would prevail in America? Is America's tolerance, acceptance and even embrace of diversity a superficial and shallow thing that must...
by Texasbeta6 years ago
It appears that modern conservatism, built on ideas of ideas from William F Buckley, Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, Leo Strauss, Russell Kirk, Joseph McCarthy and the like...formed those ideas as a result of the civil...
by Ron Montgomery3 years ago
Arizona RepublicIt won't sit well with the "they's all illegals" crowd, but this is what effective, humane immigration policy sprouts from.
by glendoncaba7 years ago
Yea! I have written the hub on the debate because I am so amazed that every hillbilly and his homosexual cousin is out to get this girl? Do the gay rights people rule the world of public opinion? Or is...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.